I forget Baine's reasoning, but it was done to repay Jaina for what she'd done in helping him with Thudner Bluff. Think she provided money for mercs or something, I forget. Anyway, he didn't realize that Garrosh was going to wait as long as he did and allow the Alliance to actually put up a defense that fought the siege back.

I got the impression he did so so the Alliance would better prepare their defenses, which is silly in a way since thats means he is increasing the danger for himself and the Horde.

But...thats what happens when you dont view the enemy as nothing but an enemy

The warning was so Jaina wouldn't be caught unawares. Considering Baine didn't know Garrosh intended to wait a week, “He will shortly be ordering the Horde to march on Theramore. And mark me well, their numbers are strong. As you are now, you will fall.” Baine probably meant for them to evacuate since he didn't think they would have time to call in reinforcements.

Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment

´So.. sorry to bring this up but..you know that .."thing" (Med'an).. is that "thing" cannon still?
...as much have some have wished otherwise, yes. (Loreology)

but I also remember Baine saying the warning was meant "to prevent an Alliance massacre not cause a Horde one" - along those lines

That IDK. I only looked at the part where Perith is giving Jaina the message.

EDIT: I found it: "Even so, the warning had been given to prevent a massacre of the Alliance, not so that the Alliance would have a chance to massacre the Horde." More indication that he wanted Jaina to evacuate, not for them to fortify and cause more Horde deaths.

Last edited by Aquamonkey; 2013-07-27 at 12:47 AM.

Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment

´So.. sorry to bring this up but..you know that .."thing" (Med'an).. is that "thing" cannon still?
...as much have some have wished otherwise, yes. (Loreology)

She did that because the Sunreavers betrayed her and used Dalaran's Neutrality to steal the divine bell. It's NOT because theramore. Get your facts checked.

- - - Updated - - -

Excuse me, monopoly on lore and more zones?
In Vanilla there was hardly ever a lore development.
In TBC We were mostly dealing with blood elf lore development ending in the purifiying of the Sunwell
In Wrath both factions got lore development (if you hordes think you didn't: The rise of garrosh, the creation of the plague, etc etc)
And since Cata its all Hordey-thrallfest.

Yes, lore... that stuff that books are filled with. The Alliance dominated books and the comics... and the manga. in game, there was lore but not as out going until wotlk, but to say the rise of garrosh and creation of the the plague was lore is ridiculous. Garrosh sat in his base and said a few lines to Saurfang and had a couple mean things to say to Varian. There was no completion of the plague for us, it was just something that happened in a cutscene, there was no driving lore for it... smh.

Bolvar, Darian, Tirion and Arthas were leading the expansion in lore, they are all alliance.

Yes, lore... that stuff that books are filled with. The Alliance dominated books and the comics... and the manga. in game, there was lore but not as out going until wotlk, but to say the rise of garrosh and creation of the the plague was lore is ridiculous. Garrosh sat in his base and said a few lines to Saurfang and had a couple mean things to say to Varian. There was no completion of the plague for us, it was just something that happened in a cutscene, there was no driving lore for it... smh.

Bolvar, Darian, Tirion and Arthas were leading the expansion in lore, they are all alliance.

Leading the expansion in lore. That's an overstatement...Varian had as much screentime as Garrosh, and he is the only guy that is really alliance from theese you counted.

Bolvar, Darian, Tirion and Arthas were leading the expansion in lore, they are all alliance.

Nonsense, Arthas hasn's "Been alliance" since about 2/3 of the way through "Warcraft III" human campaign (When he lost his marbles and then his soul up in Northrend), Tirion was neutral way back in Vanilla (Helped an orc in some pre-WoW novel and got banished for it, IIRC) and stayed neutral in Wrath doing the whole "Skippy the uber-paladin"-routine, Darion was alliance years ago (Got turned into a DK when he was part of the argent dawn, oh look! a neutral faction!), Bolvar was the only one of those who was actually member of the alliance during WotLK, or indeed at any point of the WoW-timeline.

Generous, considering Jaina and Theramore is responsible for the razing of Taurajo.

Holy hell, big deal.
Taurajo was a strategical thorn in the alliance's ass, they couldnt leave it just sitting there. Plus they let the civilians escape. Except the ones that were dumb enough to fight trained soldiers with skinning knifes.

Holy hell, big deal.
Taurajo was a strategical thorn in the alliance's ass, they couldnt leave it just sitting there. Plus they let the civilians escape. Except the ones that were dumb enough to fight trained soldiers with skinning knifes.

If you reread my comment, I was saying that it was generous for Baine to be so gracious as to give Jaina a heads up- when she's been killing tauren he's responsible for. Not that Taurajo=Theramore as strategic equivalents.

On a side note, though, who the fuck wages war in terms of equivalences anyhow? I'm pretty sure most people stop doing that around age 5.

If you reread my comment, I was saying that it was generous for Baine to be so gracious as to give Jaina a heads up- when she's been killing tauren he's responsible for. Not that Taurajo=Theramore as strategic equivalents.

On a side note, though, who the fuck wages war in terms of equivalences anyhow? I'm pretty sure most people stop doing that around age 5.

Jaina helped Baine a lot more to counter the razing of Taurajo, plus they are kinda buddies. Baine should be more mad at Garrosh for starting the war and promting alliance to invade the barrens. Plus he killed his pop.

Leading the expansion in lore. That's an overstatement...Varian had as much screentime as Garrosh, and he is the only guy that is really alliance from theese you counted.

I never listed Varian. all 4 characters i listed would never be caught helping the Horde nor being called Horde, but you can't say that for the Alliance. You also have the Dwarves whose 3 brothers had a large lore update that easily counters garrosh's screen time. Dont forget 1 of them is the leader of that group that does archaeology, that is an alliance exclusive group.

Wotlk = Alliance

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by mysticx

Nonsense, Arthas hasn's "Been alliance" since about 2/3 of the way through "Warcraft III" human campaign (When he lost his marbles and then his soul up in Northrend), Tirion was neutral way back in Vanilla (Helped an orc in some pre-WoW novel and got banished for it, IIRC) and stayed neutral in Wrath doing the whole "Skippy the uber-paladin"-routine, Darion was alliance years ago (Got turned into a DK when he was part of the argent dawn, oh look! a neutral faction!), Bolvar was the only one of those who was actually member of the alliance during WotLK, or indeed at any point of the WoW-timeline.

And Thrall became neutral yet the above hypocrisy didn't apply for him did it? or hows about Garrosh being a neutral baddie now? We're killing Orcs together next patch, but thats not good enough for alliance, its too much Horde for them to handle, while fighting Alliance turned baddies wasnt a problem for us for the longest time.

Arthas never once stopped being Alliance, his evil self wanted to turn everyone undead, not just kill them. He also still claimed to be king of Lordaeron. Kinda like Garrosh corrupting his ppl against their will and still calling himself warchief.

Bolvar never left the Alliance and now is probably the most powerful being on the planet(not with arthas' powers but his command of the scourge). Darion never left either, and though he formed a faction of both races, he would probably side with Alliance over Horde if it came to it. Tirion was removed from leadership of the town he governed, by showing mercy to a horde. That doesnt mean he leaves the faction. And he also proved his alliance ties by entering Northrend with them.

These are alliance characters, just as much as thrall and garrosh are horde characters. We put up with yours and enjoyed it, why hate on ours?

For one...they launched an unprovoked war of aggression and conquest on several fronts and against several nations resulting in the deaths of tens of thousands of Alliance citizens. A war ordered by Garrosh but supported by most of the Horde.

The horde and the alliance both have done war crimes against eachother.

Alliance warcrimes would be....Taurajo I presume? That's the usual example given, even though it's an example only because players don't care what happened there and go with the popular, yet erroneous, story.

But banding together to fight Garrosh is a treaty between the rebels and the alliance, to go against that treaty would be bad. The horde would never forget this, and frankly, the horde are better fighters and warriors.

Treaty? What Treaty? They came to an informal understanding and the VJ couldn't even uphold his half. There was no Treaty.

Ironic. Many Horde players suggest nothing is wrong and that the Alliance players should just shut up and quit whining.

and all you whine about is how you want absolute favoritism despite being unwilling to see the issues the other side too faces, or be content with what you actually have and just want more, it really is beyond discussing with you.

The Alliance players want a story, they want their faction to be treated with the same respect as the Horde. They have the right to expect that, and they have the right to express their displeasure when that isn't delivered.

Funny how none of the lessons taught in pandaria washes here.

That's because Pandaria doesn't really teach anything. It tries, but it shoves so many contradictions and plain untruths down your throat the lesson just gets lost.

Originally Posted by Goosfraba

Imagine there is a leader so corrupt that most of the people under their tyranny want them out of power.

As opposed to Garrosh who actually has a fair measure of support.

Now imagine your country rallies with those who want them out

Never forgetting that those people are also your lifelong enmiees who supported the regime and its aims until it turned on them as well.

A) work with the native people you just fought side-by-side with, who now share a common positive experience that could evolve into peace and friendship, or
B) dump massive resources you may not be able to afford to control your new friends, making new hatreds, and maintaining an occupation in the capital and birthplace of the population of two major races.

B. Because you hate each other anyway, don't owe the people YOU helped anything and because they still hold the lands and territory you want back.

I would shake hands with my new friends, help them recover where I'm asked to, and otherwise walk away. God forbid that the result of war ever be peace /sarcasm.

As those "friends" still hold vast tracts of your territory and are unlikely to give them back to you (some friends, eh?) and turned on their master only because he was mean to them as oppposed to any moral quandries about how evil he was to you the question is not whether you would shake hands.

The question is whether you would reward their unprovoked aggression and overlook their unwarranted invasion of your lands and the slaughter of tens of thousands of your people and encourage them to rebuild and attack again as they have done in the past, sacrficing your future peace and security simply so you can have the warm glow of "moral superiority".

Originally Posted by Hardstyler01

It CANNOT happen, since Cataclysm merely balanced out the amount of zones each side has.

It CAN happen because zone count is a stupid aspect to balance around as it affects nothing. Even if it was, all Blizzard needs to do is keep the war going, force the Alliance out of Org, and simply hve them make strong gains. Or make a pure lore based impact. Or use phasing.

Originally Posted by Taftvalue

can we stop discussing alliance lore and accept that the people that demand alliance favoritism are whiny brats

Asking for equal treatment isn't asking for favoritism. Asking for the Alliance to be treated with soemd egree of respect isn't asking for favoritism. Blizzrad doens;'t have to give the Allaicne the lands back, buitt here certainly isn't anything stopping the Alliance insisting on it. Blizzard has several ways it can deal with this; making the Alliance looks like chumps is a poor option.

The Alliance needs a viable reason to overlook the continued occupation of their territories and "moral superiority" and "reparations" does NOT come anywhere close to providing that reason.

Originally Posted by MathAddict

It also makes sense for Varian to show a sign of good will to the new warchief.

No. It doesn't. Goodwill comes when the war is over. And the war shouldn't end until the Alliance either gets its lands back, or is defeated.

What would make for a better peace, one full of conditions or one where Varian ask for nothing?

On where the Alliance actually gets its lands back and has no reason to fight the Horde again. One where the Horde doesn't learn that the Alliance is weak and won't fight for what it owns.

At best, you could only have the zones back on paper.

Poor as it is, that would suffice.

The alliance is not leaving empty handed, they are leaving with the new horde owing the alliance a giant debt of gratitude.

Worth the paper its written on.

Originally Posted by Aquamonkey

No, you said Varian could crush the Horde then and there at Orgrimmar, "Actually, Varian is pretty much able to crush the Horde then and there according to Wrathion but he chooses not to." That is completely wrong. Wrathion says it would have been a long, drawn out conflict with massive casualties, lasting at least a year before the Horde would have been defeated.

Taking Org deals the Horde a killing blow. Its when the War ends because it means the horde can no longer maintain a decent chance of victory. They'll have lost supplies, leadership, their elite troops, industries and so on.

Originally Posted by Oncereborn

Why is it always the Alliance that complain about things like this?

Because the Horde actually gets a story and development and thus there is relatively little for us to complain about.

Originally Posted by MikeBogina

"ERMERGERD BLIZZARD IS BIAS FOR KEEPING GAME BALANCED"

Thats what i got from all of this. For the longest time Alliance had a monopoly on lore and more zones, and now its even and you ppl aren't happy. You even get to kill Horde characters next patch and you're not happy.

How's about the fact that lorewise the Horde is at a disadvantage, or that we lose many of our few characters we have, while the Alliance lose no major characters??

Seriously people, this isnt Tera, there's 2 factions here and they both deserve the same amount of attention, in game and lorewise.

Even if that was a valid reason, it deosn't excue the sheer lack the Alliance have gotten.

Originally Posted by The Fiend

How the hell are you going to force the Horde to dismantle itself?

After the SoO? Do nothing. The thing is, as things stand, the Horde is doomed. Three of its members have little reason or desire to be there. Of the remainder, one would have lost the trust of the othe two.

Plot armor is what will keep the Horde together. Nothign really too wrong with that given its a gamne...but if Blizzard wants Varian to leave, that should feature somewhere in his excuse.

Originally Posted by composemail

Generous, considering Jaina and Theramore is responsible for the razing of Taurajo.

And what was wrong with that, give its war? A legitimate target was taken out with minimum loss of life on both sides.

Am I missing something in the story of the siege here, or is it not the Horde and the Alliance working together to kill Garrosh? We're allowing them to help us kill our own Warchief, why would we owe the Alliance something afterwards? Does the Alliance not want to kill Garrosh anyways? We're allowing that to happen and even becoming equal partners in doing so. Why should either side be specially rewarded? The Alliance is not "Conquering" Orgrimarr? The Horde is helping just as much. We're a Coup of sorts formed from members of both factions. Garrosh and the Korkram are not = the horde! They are simply the corrupt current leadership group of the Horde. Therefore, since the Allies are in no way "Conquering" the "Horde", they are no more deserving of Horde lands then the Horde is worth of additional Ally lands as a result of the victory. Its an equal victory, the Horde forms a new, less corrupt leadership group, and both sides go on their merry way happy!

- - - Updated - - -

And Varian will leave Orgrimarr willingly because if he doesn't, the Horde will kick his ass! Defeating Garrosh and his Korkram will in no way defeat the horde, only its corrupt leadership group. If anything, the death of Garrosh will bring the Horde closer together. Do you honestly think the Horde would let King Varian stay in Orgrimarr and issue demands once they have control of their own faction again? Don't be silly. Varian will leave Orgrimarr peacefully because he's not dumn, and he values his life.

Am I missing something in the story of the siege here, or is it not the Horde and the Alliance working together to kill Garrosh? We're allowing them to help us kill our own Warchief, why would we owe the Alliance something afterwards? Does the Alliance not want to kill Garrosh anyways? We're allowing that to happen and even becoming equal partners in doing so. Why should either side be specially rewarded? The Alliance is not "Conquering" Orgrimarr? The Horde is helping just as much. We're a Coup of sorts formed from members of both factions. Garrosh and the Korkram are not = the horde! They are simply the corrupt current leadership group of the Horde. Therefore, since the Allies are in no way "Conquering" the "Horde", they are no more deserving of Horde lands then the Horde is worth of additional Ally lands as a result of the victory. Its an equal victory, the Horde forms a new, less corrupt leadership group, and both sides go on their merry way happy!

- - - Updated - - -

And Varian will leave Orgrimarr willingly because if he doesn't, the Horde will kick his ass! Defeating Garrosh and his Korkram will in no way defeat the horde, only its corrupt leadership group. If anything, the death of Garrosh will bring the Horde closer together. Do you honestly think the Horde would let King Varian stay in Orgrimarr and issue demands once they have control of their own faction again? Don't be silly. Varian will leave Orgrimarr peacefully because he's not dumn, and he values his life.

1. Why would the Alliance not take back lands that were taken from them by Garrosh's horde just because the rebels turn against him too? There's no reason for the Alliance, lore wise, to not use this opportunity and momentum to retake Ashenvale and Gilneas at least.

2. The information we have so far indicates the Alliance is coming out of this stronger, and Varian decides to leave to prevent further bloodshed and not because he fears the Horde. Wrathion's audio, the only thing we really have to go for right now, suggests he's in a position where he could keep hitting the horde until it 'caves.' Dev comments have also said that the Horde will be coming out of this conflict weaker than the Alliance, while the Alliance is united and strong.

1. Why would the Alliance not take back lands that were taken from them by Garrosh's horde just because the rebels turn against him too? There's no reason for the Alliance, lore wise, to not use this opportunity and momentum to retake Ashenvale and Gilneas at least.

2. The information we have so far indicates the Alliance is coming out of this stronger, and Varian decides to leave to prevent further bloodshed and not because he fears the Horde. Wrathion's audio, the only thing we really have to go for right now, suggests he's in a position where he could keep hitting the horde until it 'caves.' Dev comments have also said that the Horde will be coming out of this conflict weaker than the Alliance, while the Alliance is united and strong.

Alliance coming out "stronger" does not imply "much stronger" or "invincible". Once Garrosh is dead, the Horde will be quite happy to let the Alliance leave Orgrimarr peacefully. However, if the Alliance then turned on the entire Horde and tried to conquer or take back lands, do you think the Horde would just lay down and let them have it? No, there would be more conflict, more fighting, and more bloodshed. Also, the Horde is fractured and in need of some rebuilding once Garrosh is dead, but how long do you think it would take them to reunite if the Alliance became "the enemy" and "an immediate threat" immediately following the siege. The Horde will not feel like they "owe" the Alliance anything just because they killed a common enemy together, so any attempt on the Alliance part to conquer or take back any land would be met with conflict, not negotiations. I think Varian just understands this, and decides to get while the getting is good, and escape with the military advantage that they gain from killing the Warchief of the Horde. I'm sure many lives, both Alliance and Horde will have been lost by the time Garrosh Hellscream falls, and I think also an attempt to crush the remainder of the Horde with a tired and depleted group would be a much more difficult task anyways. They'll live to fight another day for the lands they want back. After all, there are more expansion, hence much more opportunities to fight the horde over this land.

Alliance coming out "stronger" does not imply "much stronger" or "invincible". Once Garrosh is dead, the Horde will be quite happy to let the Alliance leave Orgrimarr peacefully. However, if the Alliance then turned on the entire Horde and tried to conquer or take back lands, do you think the Horde would just lay down and let them have it? No, there would be more conflict, more fighting, and more bloodshed. Also, the Horde is fractured and in need of some rebuilding once Garrosh is dead, but how long do you think it would take them to reunite if the Alliance became "the enemy" and "an immediate threat" immediately following the siege. The Horde will not feel like they "owe" the Alliance anything just because they killed a common enemy together, so any attempt on the Alliance part to conquer or take back any land would be met with conflict, not negotiations. I think Varian just understands this, and decides to get while the getting is good, and escape with the military advantage that they gain from killing the Warchief of the Horde. I'm sure many lives, both Alliance and Horde will have been lost by the time Garrosh Hellscream falls, and I think also an attempt to crush the remainder of the Horde with a tired and depleted group would be a much more difficult task anyways. They'll live to fight another day for the lands they want back. After all, there are more expansion, hence much more opportunities to fight the horde over this land.

Not invincible, but Wrathion's audio suggests that, while there would be heavy casualties and another year or so of fighting, Varian is in an advantageous position enough that he COULD defeat the Horde if he thought the price high enough. But there is a middle ground between doing nothing and trying to utterly destroy the horde. From what we've heard I even would go so far as to say it sounds like the Alliance will come out 'much stronger.'

From what devs have said, he doesn't leave out of fear for his life, and the alliance is coming out MUCH stronger and united. How long would the Alliance stay united if Varian decided to leave the worgen and night elves out in the rain by not reclaiming eastern ashenvale and Gilneas? Especially with Gilneas, an entire nation forced to flee their homeland.

That said, it's all speculation until we see that cut scene, but what information we DO have suggests that Varian was in a position where he could, over time and with losses, shatter the horde but decides to end the bloodshed there, but that doesn't mean they don't want their stolen lands back.

Not invincible, but Wrathion's audio suggests that, while there would be heavy casualties and another year or so of fighting, Varian is in an advantageous position enough that he COULD defeat the Horde if he thought the price high enough. But there is a middle ground between doing nothing and trying to utterly destroy the horde. From what we've heard I even would go so far as to say it sounds like the Alliance will come out 'much stronger.'

From what devs have said, he doesn't leave out of fear for his life, and the alliance is coming out MUCH stronger and united. How long would the Alliance stay united if Varian decided to leave the worgen and night elves out in the rain by not reclaiming eastern ashenvale and Gilneas? Especially with Gilneas, an entire nation forced to flee their homeland.

That said, it's all speculation until we see that cut scene, but what information we DO have suggests that Varian was in a position where he could, over time and with losses, shatter the horde but decides to end the bloodshed there, but that doesn't mean they don't want their stolen lands back.

Like I said, there's a whole nother patch coming up. We have no real idea what surprises await. Maybe that just isn't the time for it. Garrosh would probably have made the decision to kick the enemy while they were down and crush them while they had the opportunity. Maybe that's one thing that separates humans from crazy warmongering Orcs

Like I said, there's a whole nother patch coming up. We have no real idea what surprises await. Maybe that just isn't the time for it. Garrosh would probably have made the decision to kick the enemy while they were down and crush them while they had the opportunity. Maybe that's one thing that separates humans from crazy warmongering Orcs

Yeah. We don't know for sure yet, but what information we do have suggests that fear of the horde is far from Varian's motivation for withdrawing from Orgrimmar. I'm really curious to see how they manage that cutscene.